FFP and all that... - inadvertent consequences?

td53

td53

Well-known member
I was listening to a podcast this week where they were discussing ticket prices and the ongoing touristification/gentrification of Premier League football.

A point they made - which was quite thought provoking - was that whilst ticket prices are a relatively small percentage of income, the fine margins of FFP (i.e the need to show your spending is in line with income) meant that clubs are under pressure to maximise every possible bit of revenue.

Could, therefore, the increasing scrutiny over finances have a negative impact on supporters? That scrutiny is only going to get greater over the next few years.

It's an interesting point - can you have the kind of FFP style regulation without putting pressure on ticket prices? 17 of the 20 Prem clubs have put up prices for next year. I think I'm right in saying that the 3 that haven't haven't yet announced. One club (can't remember who) have removed OAP pricing and another have stopped allowing even a reduced price carers ticket meaning disabled fans who require a carer effectively have to pay double price as the carer ticket is 100% price as well.

How could you fix this? A standard ticket price for all clubs?
 
Yet some throw their hands up in horror at a salary cap. Fleece those that are least able to pay, to support a rich mans vanity project.
 
I think you’ve got to consider ticket prices based on the demographics relevant to the clubs.

If you’re an OAP (and surely that's a definition that needs some serious scrutiny given average working ages etc) and you’re wanting to be going to Spurs games I’m not exactly convinced they’ll be experiencing any significant financial difficulties!

The demographics of Blackpool though would make this a very different scenario here.

I think ticket prices should reflect the communities but I think its necessary for the FA to put some controls in to protect away fans.
 
Its an interesting dilemma; touristification and financialisation, has the consequence of gentrification. the interesting dilemma, is the tourist part of the business is driven by the match day experience or at least the projection of the experience as percieved in various media, news, tv matches etc. As clubs chase the tourists, and other gentrified followers, corporate sponsors etc the experience over time will diminish, so the game has to change to accomodate the tourists and non supporters of the club, or even the game. The atmosphere becomes very sterile and suddenly its nt a tourist attraction. As the game changes it also potentially becomes less of a spectacle further pushing actual fans out of the game. The plans of the Euro PL were just such an example, an international audience, massive TV rights (potentially) but little in the way of club affiliation at actual games, and the league itself becomes something of a non event.

Something has to be done about football costs, but wage caps are cultural no-no's. If it happens in football then whats to say the rest of the corporate world wouldnt want to apply wage caps to all but the very top echelons of companies. the very same football fans who are getting stiffed by their clubs would be the same people getting stiffed by their employers (if they are not already). The amounts of money that go out of the game could be better controlled, agents etc, but again a business is a business.

To some extent the problem is similar to the problem with core utilities, in that the profitisation and financialisation focuses on the short term and the long term sustainability gets put on a back shelf. As with core utilities the solution might be in making the clubs community resources, with a specific responsibility cultural and financial to their local area: obviously the various oligarchs, equity funds and other financial house owners .along with state sportwashing entities will not like that at all.

I think the game will have to change to more american models of franchises at the top end to sustain the bigger clubs, which will attract 90% of the money and the rest of the game goes back to its roots, but even then looking at the american model for regional and grass roots sports that is also full of shysters ruining the games through their money grubbing activities, and there is even more exploitation of players.

I personally think that FFP is very badly constructed and actually benefits the top teams rather than creating a more level platform, but then when you have a world dictated to by financial interests then the biggest financial interests will always win out.

Standard ticket prices would additionally hit the smaller clubs much harder than the biggest unless of course that smaller club abandoned its core support base and fully financialised its operations. The various football authorities, english and global, have truly fucked the game by focusing almost exclusively on financial advancement and protection of club ownership. Pricing fans out of the game is a small price to pay (in the exact same way (sorry for the politics) that the ERG thought destroying the UK farming industry was a reasonable price to pay for Brexit) for the incredible wealth that gets to be distributed amongst a select few.

i was listening to a pod cast about movie financing and the way that has changed since Netflix came on the scene, the 80 to 100 million dollar pay days for a star actor have been and gone, so maybe there is and entirely new model to pop up that we just dont know yet. if its an equivalent to a netflix or a spotify for example it will be even more financially precipitous and fundamentally more exploiative to those in the game and those true followers.
 
td53 said:
I was listening to a podcast this week where they were discussing ticket prices and the ongoing touristification/gentrification of Premier League football.

A point they made - which was quite thought provoking - was that whilst ticket prices are a relatively small percentage of income, the fine margins of FFP (i.e the need to show your spending is in line with income) meant that clubs are under pressure to maximise every possible bit of revenue.

Could, therefore, the increasing scrutiny over finances have a negative impact on supporters? That scrutiny is only going to get greater over the next few years.

It's an interesting point - can you have the kind of FFP style regulation without putting pressure on ticket prices? 17 of the 20 Prem clubs have put up prices for next year. I think I'm right in saying that the 3 that haven't haven't yet announced. One club (can't remember who) have removed OAP pricing and another have stopped allowing even a reduced price carers ticket meaning disabled fans who require a carer effectively have to pay double price as the carer ticket is 100% price as well.

How could you fix this? A standard ticket price for all clubs?
Click to expand...
As has been said, the club looking to reduce its proportion of over 65s and reduce concessions is Tottenham. Maguire thinks it will raise just about enough extra money to pay their best paid Director's wages for one year (as long as he doesn't get a bonus).

On the demographic point - Tottenham do have a lot of well to do supporters. But their ground is also in one of the poorer parts of London and any locals who follow them and dare to grow old are going to find it increasingly difficult to afford tickets.

And what is all this for? I was reading a tweet by Maguire in the last day or so in which he observed that in the space of a year the amount of money that EPL clubs owe in transfer payments has gone up from £1.6 billion to £2.5 billion plus whatever Chelsea owe (their accounts are late). So while they are putting prices up generally and discriminating against the elderly in one or two cases, the EPL clubs are continuing to spunk away enormous sums on buying and selling players, and adding to their overall levels of debt.
 
Last edited:
Charging supporters more is one option, paying players, coaching staff, directors of football etc and agents less is another, I'd go with the second option.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top